Philippians | Knowable Word

The Art of Observing What’s Not Said

January 13, 2023 By Peter Krol

We’ve mentioned it a thousand times: When we observe a passage of the Bible, we’re trying to figure out what it says. However, sometimes we won’t fully grasp what it says without first observing what it doesn’t say. Ryan has made this point in two recent posts with respect to characters’ names. But what’s not said applies to many other types of observation as well. Here are three examples.

Example #1: Luke 15:11-32

The parable commonly known as “The Prodigal Son” is really about Two Brothers. We’re told of the bad choices of the younger son (Luke 15:12-16), and his risky decision to come back home (Luke 15:17-19). We’re told about what happened upon his return (father runs to meet him, throws a party, etc., in Luke 15:20-24).

Then we’re told of the bad attitude and choices of the older son (Luke 15:25-30). We hear the father’s appeal to his grumbling son (Luke 15:31-32). But we never find out what he decided or what happened.

The two brothers are parallel to one another. Their stories are parallel. Up to the point where we expect to hear the choice and results of the older son’s decision. But that choice and its results are left unsaid. The parable simply ends on a cliffhanger.

What is the point of the omission? Jesus lets the end of the story play itself out in the response of the Pharisees and scribes who were grumbling (Luke 15:2). Luke 13-14 was all about the feast and joy of the kingdom of God. Will these grumbling scribes and Pharisees enter? Will those who are saved be few (Luke 13:23)?

Example #2: Psalm 55

This emotional poem is about the pain and paranoia of betrayal. The whole poem is rather scatter-shot, without a clearly discernible structure, perhaps reflecting the manic state David is in as he composes it.

David describes the anguish of his fear, terror, and horror (Ps 55:4-5). He wants nothing more than to get out of the situation (Ps 55:6-8). And he asks God to do something about the situation (Ps 55:9).

But look at the last line of the poem. As David’s complaints rise to their peak, notice where he finally lands. He does not put his trust in what God will do. That’s how I would end such a prayer; how about you?

Instead, he ends with a declaration of trust in God himself. This might not be how we expect the poem to end, so noticing what he doesn’t say makes what he actually says really pop.

Example #3: Philippians 4:4

Here is the verse in its entirety: “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice.”

In this example, I encourage you to observe what is not present at the beginning of the verse. Something that nearly everyone who reads the passage presumes is there, or at least they act like it’s there.

What is this absent wonder of which I speak? A transition.

This verse has no transition. No connector word at all to link it, divide it, or contrast it with the previous verse. This absence of a transition is one reason I believe Paul is not changing the subject. There is a “finally” in verse 8, which could be a transition to a new unit of thought (or simply conclude the list practical suggestions). Verse 10 switches from present to past tense and has “now at length,” which certainly signals a transition to a new idea.

So noticing what’s not said may help us to follow Paul’s argument, so we might avoid separating his counsel (Phil 4:4-9) from the very situation to which he directed that counsel (Phil 4:2-3).

Conclusion

Observing what’s not said is definitely an art and not a science, so you need to use common sense. Identify what you might expect from a passage. Then make sure to observe how (and whether) the text subverts those expectations to sharpen its argument. The biblical authors are constantly working to subvert our expectations so they might better persuade us to trust the Lord and seek first his kingdom.

Grammar Crash Course: Clauses

December 2, 2022 By Peter Krol

What makes this paragraph so strange?

Unsteadily wobbling toward me, when my son’s arms stretch out. In my heart of hearts like a flame. Speaking my name—”Papa”—for the first time, but sounding like too many margaritas: “Baba.” Joy to explode in here. Happiness over there. Resounding exultation on all sides. Not a toddler but a teenager-in-training. Flos floridus.

If I treated it like a poem and gave each unit of thought a separate line, there would be no big deal. You could probably follow along.

But as a standard prose paragraph, it doesn’t quite work. Despite hints of comprehensibility, there remains something sorely lacking. The paragraph’s citizens include not a single independent clause.

Distinguishing Dependency

In English, there are two main types of clause: independent and dependent.

Independent clauses contain a complete thought that could function as a complete sentence.
Dependent clauses don’t contain a complete thought and can’t function as a complete sentence.

In the paragraph above, “unsteadily wobbling toward me” is not a complete thought because it has no subject, and -ing verbs cannot stand on their own as main verbs. To make the clause independent, I could add to it (He is unsteadily wobbling toward me) or revise it (He unsteadily wobbles toward me).

The grammatical rules and explanation of dependency can get far more complex than this, but the most important thing to know is this idea of a “complete” thought. Take any phrase or clause and say it out loud. Ask yourself: Could this stand by itself in a conversation? If so, it’s probably an independent clause. If not, it’s probably a dependent clause.

“When my son’s arms stretch out.” That could not stand alone; it must be dependent. “My sons arms stretch out”—that minor omission transforms the dependent clause into an independent one.

Why It Matters

Distinguishing dependent clauses from independent clauses may seem like an obscure and academic thing to do. Not the most thrilling way to occupy one’s morning. But this is perhaps the most important grammatical skill to master for your Bible study to go anywhere. Especially when you study epistles.

One of the greatest challenges of studying an epistle is that the sentences are often so loooooooong. We must have a way to identify which part of the sentence carries the most weight. Or how the parts relate to one another. Without that skill, all we’ve got is gut instinct. So we just camp out on a single word or phrase that strikes our fancy, and we reflect ponderously on the deep things of the universe contained in that word or phrase. And the apostles’ harps pop a string every time someone on earth reads their magnificent works of literature in such a demeaning manner.

When facing those long sentences, the best thing you can do is label the clauses as either independent or dependent. Then, set aside all the dependent clauses for a time to focus your attention on the independent clauses. The dependent clauses are dependent because they are depending on something. That something is going to be the more important part of the sentence. In other words, the independent clauses in a sentence contain the main idea(s) of the sentence. The dependent clauses are either window dressing or evidence for those main ideas. So to grasp the main ideas we must recognize the independent clauses.

If you fail to recognize independent clauses, you will fail to grasp the main point of a sentence. If you fail to grasp the main point of a sentence, you’ll fail to grasp the main point of the paragraph. Fail to do that, and… Well, let’s just say you might as well be looking at the Greek original (or if know Greek, let’s say you might as well be looking at an Urdu translation) for all the good it will do you.

Examples

In the ESV, Ephesians 1:3-4 is one long sentence. “Who has blessed us in Christ” and “even as he chose us in him” and “that we should be holy and blameless” are all dependent clauses. None of them carries the sentence’s main idea. “Blessed be the God and Father”—now we’re talking! That’s independent, containing a complete thought. So the main idea of the sentence is that God is blessed. The rest of the sentence expands on that idea and gives it more detail. But let’s make sure not to focus on the hows and whys of what God did to the point of forgetting Paul’s emphasis on who this God is. How blessed he is.

Or take Philippians 4:8. Every clause that starts with “whatever is” is dependent. The independent clause is “brothers…think about these things.” Now it is crucial to understand the nature of those things we ought to think about (true, honorable, etc.). But a word study on “true,” another on “honorable,” and another on “just” will prevent you from interpreting the sentence. Paul’s point is not to define a whole set of virtues. His purpose is to command his people to think about the right set of virtues.

Though it’s not from an epistle, John 3:16 gives another great case study. “That he gave his only Son” and “that whoever believes in him should not perish” are both dependent. The main, independent clause is “God so loved the world.” The dependent clauses explain how God loved the world (he gave his Son) and why God loved the world (so people could not perish but have life). But those ideas support the main idea that God loved the world. If we shift the emphasis from that main clause, we will struggle to make sense of what else Jesus says to Nicodemus in this passage.

Difficult texts: Colossians 1:24

March 12, 2021 By Tom Hallman

Recently I led a Bible Study in Colossians 1. It’s a fantastic chapter that radically exalts Christ and informs us of His absolute preeminence in all things.

Well, at least until you hit verse 24…

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church. (Colossians 1:24 ESV, emphasis mine)

Wait a minute… did Paul really just say that? In Paul’s flesh he is filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions? How could he say that after what he had just written previously, that Jesus had made “peace by the blood of His cross.” (Colossians 1:20 ESV)? What could possibly be lacking in Christ’s afflictions?

When we come upon such difficult texts, we’re left with several choices:

Ignore the text: While that’s sometimes the best thing to do temporarily so that you can keep moving forward in trying to understand the rest of a passage, it’s neither good nor wise to ignore any teaching of Scripture (See 2 Tim 3:16-17).
Guess its meaning: Sadly, this is what we tend to do all too often, and it means that what we come up with is at best unreliable – and quite possibly much worse. For example, it would be very wrong to conclude here that Christ’s atonement requires the work of another to be effective! Whenever in doubt, it’s better to say, “I don’t know” than to assume something false in Scripture.
Use Scripture to interpret Scripture: While God does not give us every answer to every question in Scripture, He has nonetheless given us His knowable Word. So we ought to ask ourselves if Scripture answers this question itself. Let’s consider this option further.

Sometimes we need only look a verse or two away to find the meaning. In this case, however, we need to flip a couple pages back to Philippians 2. At the very end of that chapter we find this text:

I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me. (Philippians 2:25-30 ESV, emphasis mine)

Here Paul writes of Epaphroditus that he risked his life to complete (or fill up) what was lacking in the Philippians’ service to Paul. That’s very similar language to Colossians 1:24, but what does it mean?

Paul tells us a few verses earlier that Epaphroditus was a messenger sent from the Philippians to minister to Paul’s needs. So Paul is certainly not complaining of their deficiency of service. What else could it mean? It appears that because the Philippians could not themselves physically be present with Paul to minister to him, they sent a representative: Epaphroditus. So that is what Paul means by “what was lacking”.

With that in mind, let’s return again to Colossians 1:24:

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church. (Colossians 1:24 ESV)

As was the case in the Philippians passage, Paul is not making up for some deficiency in Christ’s atoning work (as if one existed). Rather, because Christ has ascended to be seated at the right hand of His Father in heaven, He cannot be physically present to minister to the Colossians. So He sent a representative: Paul. Mystery solved!

Now, that’s only a tiny sampling of what can be gleaned from Colossians 1:24, but at least we’re safely back in line with the teaching of Scripture. We can confidently rejoice in the completed work of our knowable Savior, Jesus Christ, as demonstrated in His knowable Word.

Context Matters: He Who Began a Good Work in You

May 24, 2019 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard that the one who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ (Phil 1:6). Perhaps this promise has encouraged you to press on in the Christian life, maturing and becoming more like Jesus day by day. And while this could certainly be part of Paul’s intended meaning in this verse, perhaps there is something more in the context we tend to miss.

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of quotable quotes or personal promises—we’ll find that some of our most familiar sayings have more to say than we typically assume.

Personal Sanctification

The popular usage of this verse—to refer to an individual’s sanctification between now and the day of judgment—can certainly be supported from the context.

Paul follows up the promise in verse 6 with a defense of how he feels toward the Philippians (Phil 1:7). He then prays for their love to abound, with knowledge and all discernment (Phil 1:9). He wants them to approve what is excellent (Phil 1:10a). And he wants them to be pure and blameless for the day of Christ (Phil 1:10b), filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ (Phil 1:11).

So with the repetition of “day of (Jesus) Christ,” the explanation of his affection, and the clarification of each person’s purity and righteousness—the popular use of this verse to refer to individual sanctification fits. So much, so good.

Communal Partnership

But look at what else we find in the surrounding context.

“I thank my God in all my remembrance of you…because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now.”
Phil 1:3-5

The sentence immediately preceding the promise of verse 6 is Paul’s expression of prayerful thanks for the Philippians’ financial partnership in his gospel ministry. Paul will return to this thanksgiving in chapter 4. In fact, he likely asks them to stop giving, since he knows they can’t really afford it (“Not that I seek the gift itself…” Phil 4:17).

In short, we see that the letter of Philippians is, at its heart, a thank-you letter from a missionary to members of his support team. And in that light, it is altogether possible that when Paul wrote of the “good work,” begun “in you,” and “brought to completion at the day of Christ,” he was speaking of this gospel partnership. God’s good work among you, Philippians, includes this outrageous generosity, which has borne much fruit in Paul’s labors around the world.

And it will be brought to completion when the final harvest is reaped on the last day, when Jesus returns to judge. The gospel will go forth, and the good work of God will be completed when the redeemed have been gathered in.

We Don’t Have to Pick One

I don’t think we can or should nail down exactly one thing that Paul meant by the “good work.” He certainly has their financial partnership in mind. But then he also immediately moves into their personal sanctification (of which their financial partnership is but one expression).

So I’m not arguing that Phil 1:6 is not about personal sanctification. I only want to add that, when we see how their communal partnership is also in view, we see personal sanctification tangibly demonstrated in the community. In this way, Phil 1:6 is similar to 3 John 8, which describes financial support of missionaries in partnership language, and as an expression of walking in the truth (3 John 4).

Context matters.

Thanks to my colleague Dave Royes for the idea for this post.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Matters: I Can Do All Things Through Him Who Strengthens Me

March 8, 2019 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve seen the face paint or placard at an athletic event: “I can do all things through him who strengthens me.” Sometimes the mere reference “Phil 4:13” is enough to inspire. Perhaps you’ve drawn on this verse to motivate your best efforts and deep confidence. But is that what Paul had in mind when he wrote it?

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of proof-texts for personal inspiration—we’ll find that some of our most familiar verses speak to situations we hadn’t considered.

Encouraging Quotes (2016), Creative Commons

What are the “All Things”?

Phil 4:13 ends a paragraph where Paul expresses joy at how concerned the Philippian church has been for him. And their “concern” was expressed through financial support of his ministry (Phil 4:15-16, 18).

Paul rejoices at their concern for him, but he wants to make sure they know that he is not in grave need (Phil 4:11). His need is not great because he has learned to be content in whatever situation he finds himself. He knows how be brought low, and he knows how to abound. He can handle plenty and abundance. He can handle hunger and need (Phil 4:12).

In other words, in all circumstances, he has learned how to be content with his lot, and to make it last as long as it must. How can he do this?

Because the one who strengthens him enables him to do it. He can survive any and every situation without panicking or being anxious. So these are the “all things” he can do: plenty and hunger, abundance and need. He can do (live with) them all, for whatever he has is just enough.

Why Does Paul Say This?

We know from the historical context that the Philippian Christians were not wealthy people themselves. Their generous contributions to Paul were given as a test of affliction, despite their extreme poverty (2 Cor 8:1-2). Though they have expressed their “concern” for Paul by giving generously, Paul has his own concern: that they may have given even beyond their means (2 Cor 8:3). This gives him a great opportunity to spur on the wealthier Corinthians to greater generosity. But it leaves him in a tough spot with the Philippians.

Is it really in their best interests to continue giving to him when they have greater need than he does?

So it’s likely that one of Paul’s motives for writing to the Philippians was to ask them to stop giving! He makes his request in quite a roundabout way, so as not to communicate any lack of gratitude.

“It was kind of you to share in my trouble” (Phil 4:14).
No church partnered with me financially except you (Phil 4:15).
You gave time and again during my time in Thessalonica (Phil 4:16).
I don’t want your money, though I am so grateful for the fruit it has borne, which is to your credit (Phil 4:17).
I’ve received it all. I’ve received enough, and more. I am well supplied already (Phil 4:18).
My God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in Christ Jesus (Phil 4:19). In other words, may God continue to grant you exceptional contentment in all circumstances.

Conclusion

Paul wants the Philippians to know that, while he is tremendously grateful for their donations, he does not need them to keep giving for him to continue in ministry. In case they fear he’ll go bankrupt without them, he wants them to know that the Lord Jesus strengthens him to endure both plenty and need, making the most of his available resources.

Context matters.

Thanks to Alison and Daniel for the idea for this post.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Matters: Forgetting What Lies Behind

March 1, 2019 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard that you ought not dwell too much on the past. Especially your regrets, failures, or inadequacies. Or maybe you’ve been to a business seminar, inspiring you to keep the past in the past and press on toward a glorious vision of the company’s future. At such times, especially if it was a Christian business conference, you may have heard reference to Phil 3:13: “…forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead…” Now are these things really what Paul had in mind?

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of sound bites or independent proverbial sayings—we’ll find that some of our most familiar verses mean something other than what we may have assumed.

The Statement

Believe it or not, the phrase in question is part of a complete sentence:

“But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” (Phil 3:13b-14)

Paul states that he does one thing. And this one thing has three parts.

Forgetting what lies behind
Straining forward to what lies ahead
Pressing on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

The first two parts set up the third part. So the “one thing” is really just the third part. The first two parts are the prerequisites for the third part.

So what Paul is after is to press on toward the goal, which is the prize of God’s upward call in Christ Jesus. Now what does that mean?

Haakon von Martinsky (2014), Creative Commons

Work Backwards

The sentence immediately before this is: “Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own” (Phil 3:13a). A critical interpretive question we ought to ask is: “What is ‘it’?” What is the thing Paul has not yet made his own?

Going back one more sentence, we see: “Not that I have already obtained this…but I press on to make it my own…” (Phil 3:12). So here we see Paul pressing on for something—a good sign that it’s the same thing as “the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” But we still don’t know what “it” is. What is the thing Paul wants to make his own, which he has not yet obtained?

Going back one more sentence, we hit a very long sentence, which ends like this:

“…that I may know him and the power of his resurrection…that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead” (Phil 3:10-11).

Now we’re getting somewhere! So the thing Paul presses on toward, that he wants to attain, is the resurrection of the dead. So it makes sense that he would later call this “the upward call.” Just as God called his Son Jesus Christ up from the grave to new life, so he calls Paul to new life, to resurrection from the dead.

Now how does this affect the way we read the phrase “forgetting what lies behind”?

The Things Paul Left Behind

We must go back a little further into the context to see what exactly Paul has left behind. What has made up his “life,” according to which he must “die” (Phil 3:10), so he might attain to resurrection?

In verse 3, Paul claims to be part of “the circumcision,” which is defined as those “who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh.” This is in contrast to the dogs and evildoers who “mutilate the flesh” (Phil 3:2). So circumcision is not about mutilating flesh—about cutting off a foreskin—but about putting no confidence in the flesh.

Paul has much reason for confidence in the flesh (Phil 3:4-6). Circumcised on the eighth day, an Israelite from the tribe of Benjamin, a superb Hebrew, a meticulous keeper of the Law, a zealous persecutor of “false” religions, a blameless adherent to the righteousness of the law.

“But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him” (Phil 3:7-9).

So all that important stuff that made up Paul’s pedigree—all the things in which he had taken pride—are now considered but manure scrapings stuck to his sandals. He was happy to lose it all for the sake of Christ. He has suffered the loss of these things so he might have new life in Christ. He has thereby shared in Christ’s sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that he might attain the resurrection from the dead (Phil 3:10-11).

Conclusion

So that which lies behind Paul, which he is committed to “forget,” is all the great stuff on his spiritual CV that formerly shaped his identity. It was all his accomplishments, his law-keeping, his zeal for God, and his righteousness. He sets all these things aside so he might obtain new life, resurrection, through knowing Jesus and becoming like him.

So this verse is not about forgetting your failures or regrets. (In fact, it’s often important to remember these things to highlight God’s grace at work in you – Eph 2:1-4, 11-13.) And it’s not about casting vision for the future. It’s about repenting of your self-reliance, and coming to realize you have absolutely nothing to offer to make you right with God. Even your obedience to God and your ministry in service to him—such things ought never be your confidence.

“Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you” (Phil 3:15).

Context matters.

Thanks to Josh T for the idea for this post, and for showing me the flow of Paul’s argument in Philippians 3.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Rethinking Our Proof Texts

May 30, 2018 By Peter Krol

Mike Leake has some important thoughts about how and when to reconsider the way we use our proof texts. As a young believer, Leake often used Phil 1:6 (“he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion”) to support the doctrine of eternal security. While he hasn’t rejected that doctrine, he has reconsidered his use of Phil 1:6 to support it.

Why? Simply because the context of Philippians 1 strongly suggests this verse is not speaking to that topic.

And why ought we to be willing to do this: to back down from using some of our favorite verses to support our favorite teaching?

First, it matters because truth matters. We cannot be loose with the truth. If we teach a right doctrine but do it the wrong way with the wrong text we are training ourselves and our people that truth is fluid and that the end justifies the means. That will not only have an impact on the way we do theology, it’ll even have an impact on the way we live our lives.

Second, it builds trust. If people know I believe a certain doctrine but see that I’m willing to concede a particular point for the sake of the truth, then it ought to build trust for the places where I’m not willing to concede a point.

The point I’ve been making for weeks now, that context matters, is not about looking superior to other people, being argumentative, or splitting hairs. This is about hearing God’s voice and not confusing it with our own. This is a matter not only of what the Scriptures say, but also of how we know what the Scriptures say.

Leake’s post gives a great example of how to think (and re-think) through these things with a particular text. Check it out!

Context Matters: Rejoice in the Lord, Don’t be Anxious, the Peace of God, Whatever is True

May 18, 2018 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve been told to rejoice in the Lord. And again I will say, rejoice! And maybe you know you shouldn’t be anxious about anything, but should let your requests be made known to God. And you know that the peace of God, which surpasses understanding, will guard your heart and mind in Christ Jesus. And finally, you know that you should think about whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, and about any excellence or anything worthy of praise.

I’m willing to wager you’ve heard each of these statements, and that each of them is meaningful to you on its own. But could there be anything more to these inspirational statements than that they just happen to exist side-by-side near the end of Paul’s letter to the Philippians?

Context matters. If we learn to read the Bible for what it is—and not as a collection of independently assembled proverbial sayings—we’ll discover that some of our most familiar passages don’t actually mean what we’ve always assumed.

Some Vulnerable Honesty

I’m about to propose a way of reading Philippians 4 that I have never heard anywhere else. I’ve never heard a sermon like this. I’ve never seen it in a commentary. I have yet to experience people outside my circles who put these ideas into practice in quite this way.

So perhaps I’m truly on to something, and we all need to remove our blinders on this passage. Or perhaps I’m being foolhardy.

While I believe OIA Bible study is the best method we can use to read the Scriptures, I also firmly believe that outrageously innovative Bible interpretation is not something to aim for. If nobody’s ever seen what I see, I should proceed with great caution. That doesn’t mean I’m wrong (any more than my innovation proves I’m right). But it means I need to tread softly and ensure I’m firmly grounded in studious observation and interpretation of the text, and not in my preconceived notions.

If I fail to do that, please feel free to call it out. And if you can point me to anyone else who has explained Phil 4 in this way, I would be delighted to hear of it.

That Said…

Paul nears the end of his letter to the Philippians. He’s worked through the glorious truths of when and how to build unity, and when not to build unity. He’s painted a compelling picture of the humility and exaltation of Christ, and of how our Christ compels us to follow him in humiliation so we can share in his exaltation.

But at the end, Paul hits on some highly practical matters.

First, there is an explosive conflict between two prominent women in the church (Phil 4:2). It’s so big that Paul’s gotten wind of it and he recruits a friend, his “true companion” to help resolve it (Phil 4:3).

Then we get a set of seemingly random but beautifully memorable memory verses (Phil 4:4-9).

Then Paul moves on to his closing thanksgiving for their financial support of his ministry (Phil 4:10-20).

Finally, he concludes his letter in his usual way (Phil 4:21-23).

So what are we to make of the instructions in Phil 4:4-9?

The Usual Approach

Normally, people read these verses as a series of scattershot principles to keep in mind about the Christian life. And this could be the case. Paul does this very thing in other epistles (Rom 16:16-20, 1 Cor 16:1-18, etc.). And other letter writers appear to do a similar thing (Hebrews 13, portions of James).

Also, one foundation of this approach is the assumption that “peace” in Phil 4:7 and Phil 4:9 is a psychological state. The “peace of God” which guards your heart and mind is something similar to contentment or security in one’s faith. This certainly fits with where Paul goes in Phil 4:10-20. And the word “peace” demonstrably has this meaning in other letters of Paul’s (Rom 14:17, Rom 15:13, possibly 1 Cor 1:3, 2 Cor 1:2, Gal 6:16, etc.).

And frankly, each verse in Phil 4:4-9 stands very well on its own. Each one makes perfect sense as a discrete instruction, listed in a series of reminders.

But What If…?

But what if that conflict between Euodia and Syntyche was so explosive that nobody knew what to do about it? I’m sure Paul was not the first person to try to help them. Neither of them are accused of selfish self-interest in preaching the gospel (Phil 1:15). Neither of them is named an evildoer, a mutilator of the flesh (Phil 3:2), an enemy of the cross of Christ (Phil 3:18), or one who ought to be looked out for, avoided, or destroyed by God.

No, they are “fellow workers.” Their names are in the book of life. They have labored side by side with Paul in the ministry of the gospel. They’ve been a part of the team. Perhaps they’ve even been leaders of teams themselves. They just have so completely misunderstood and miscommunicated with one another that they can no longer agree in the Lord (Phil 4:2-3).

Perhaps you’ve seen conflict this explosive. So strong and confusing that nobody knows what to do. There is no clear right side or wrong side, and yet the church is still being ripped apart. Both sides have a true perspective, but the perspectives just keep missing each other. And everybody suffers as a result.

Martin Pettitt (2008), Creative Commons

Now imagine that you are Paul’s “true companion,” whom he asks to help resolve this thing. How would you feel about that? Perhaps you’d be glad he didn’t name you so you could slink under the pew and pretend to be home sick that day! What would you do?

You could start by rejoicing in the Lord (Phil 4:4). Conflict always presents an opportunity to grow more like Christ. It will be better at the end than it was before the conflict broke out.
Again, you need to be reminded a second time, so you can remind everyone else: Rejoice in the Lord (Phil 4:4).
Then perhaps you could encourage each disputant to let the other side see how reasonable they can be. They should each show a willingness to listen and consider. They should both be open to understanding the other before trying to make themselves understood. They should be able to clearly distinguish the facts of the matter from their interpretations of those facts (Phil 4:5). “You hate me” is not a reasonable thing to tell someone. But, “When you said XYZ, I felt like you hated me. Is that what you meant?” is a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
All should be reminded often that the Lord is at hand (Phil 4:5). There is no excuse for caricaturing the other perspective or resorting to personal attacks. God sees, he is present, and he is aware. And he will not allow you to go undefended forever.
Explosive conflict tends to make us anxious. We don’t know what to do about it. But we can always pray. And when we pray, we are free as God’s children to ask him for deep resolution. We must make these requests with a spirit of thankfulness for the opportunities provided by the conflict (Phil 4:6).
And wonder of wonders: From a worldly point of view, we should have no reason ever to expect that warring factions could agree and come back together. But God’s peace—perhaps not a psychological state of well-being, but simply the absence of infighting—surpasses all such understanding. But that doesn’t matter, because we have every reason to believe God’s peace can and will guard hearts and minds so we can speak and act in measured, kind, and sacrificial ways (Phil 4:7).
And finally: Everyone who’s ever been in a conflict knows how the conflict shades your attitude toward your opponent. When I have concluded that someone is my enemy, they can no longer do anything right. Everything they do gets interpreted as hostile, selfish, ungodly, insincere, or aggressive. We must not do this. Instead, we are obligated to go out of our way to find something—anything!—about them that is good and praiseworthy. We must think about these things, and not about our hurt or offended feelings (Phil 4:8). It’s amazing how much this simple practice can do to lower the temperature in a heated conflict.

We can have hope that these things will work because Paul has modeled these very principles all throughout the letter (Phil 4:9). Just go back to his description of his opponents in chapter 1. How kind and gracious he is, refusing to attack or label them as hostiles! He is willing to focus on their godly motives, even while they’re causing him tremendous pain through their rivalry. At least “Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice” (Phil 1:18). Such is the attitude of one who has been brought under the reign of the God of peace (Phil 4:9).

Perhaps these verses are independently composed proverbial sayings. Perhaps.

But should it surprise us that we have such a hard time resolving conflicts between Christians if, perhaps, we have failed to recognize when the Lord provides for us a manual for peace?

Context matters.

For further explanation of this contextual flow of thought in Phil 4:2-9, see this post I wrote for the Gospel Coalition.

What to Do When Relationships Blow Up

May 27, 2015 By Peter Krol

Yesterday, The Gospel Coalition published my article about “7 Steps to Conflict Resolution.” In the article, I walk through Philippians 4:2-9 to show that – far from being a random assortment of unrelated memory verses – this section provides concrete steps for navigating excruciating conflict.

Two prominent women—Euodia and Syntyche—had a disagreement so severe and public the entire church knew about it, and word reached the Apostle Paul (Phil 4:2). These women had once been ministry partners, but now they sat on opposite sides of the table. They couldn’t resolve their concerns on their own, so Paul employed a third party—his “true companion”—to lend aid (Phil 4:3).

Far from changing the subject, Paul coached his true companion over the next few verses on the process of mediation and reconciliation, providing steps to resolution.

Paul’s 7 steps are:

Rejoice in the Lord always
Let your reasonableness be known to everyone
Remember the Lord is at hand
Don’t be anxious about the conflict, but ask God to resolve it
Guard your heart and mind with the peace of God, even when it does not make sense to do so
Find something – anything – praiseworthy to focus on in your antagonists
Find good role models and continue practicing these things

Doug Smith also recently preached a sermon on this text examining these principles further.

If you’d like to see my full article, check it out!

Clear Book Overviews

January 7, 2015 By Peter Krol

One of the most common errors in Bible study takes place when we parachute in to a certain passage, dig around a bit, secure the asset (a nugget of truth for the day), and then pursue extraction. In other words, we study Bible verses and Bible chapters, but not Bible books. But without a larger context, the passage often doesn’t make sense, and we give up in frustration, wondering whether Bible study is something best left to the experts.

The simplest solution usually lies in a good book overview. When you see the Bible as a collection of books, and you work to understand each book within its historical context (identifying the author, audience, occasion, and purpose for the book), smaller passages within the book come alive. For example, “Rejoice in the Lord” (Phil 4:4) takes on a new light when you see it’s one step in the reconciliation process between Euodia and Syntyche (Phil 4:2-9), which itself is a prime example of the joyful unity Paul seeks for the church (the main point of the letter of Philippians).

Without doubt, the best way to become at home within a Bible book is to read the book over and over. When I preach or teach a book, I usually read the entire book at least 5 times before the first session.

But sometimes we don’t have enough time for that much reading. And sometimes, we gain useful information from other sources gathered by others. So I’m always on the lookout for good articles and resources that present useful Bible book overviews.

I recently began following the blog of Jeffrey Kranz, who has given himself to creating clear and helpful overviews of every book of the Bible. I signed up for Jeffrey’s free course, where he sends a weekly email with an overview of one book of the Bible. The first one was on Psalms, and I must say I was impressed.

I thought, “Surely he’ll ignore the fact that the Psalms are organized into 5 books.” I mused, “I’ll check this out this first article, but if he missed the fact that Psalms 1 and 2 set the tone for the entire book, I’m not sure I can trust that he really understands the book.” I wondered, “Will he realize that the sons of Korah shouldn’t even have existed apart from God’s amazing grace (Num 26:11)?” (Okay, I generally try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I’ve just seen too many “Bible overview” articles that are not really very helpful.) But Jeffrey delightfully crossed my expectations on every count. Not only did he include details I expected (always pleasantly affirming); he also gave much information I hadn’t realized, which inspired me to jump back into the Psalms!

I can’t wait to see what he does with the other 65 books of the Bible. I’m happy to recommend this resource to you. If you’d like to receive Jeffrey’s emails, just sign up on his site here.

———————-

Other resources I recommend regarding book overviews:

The book introductions found in the ESV Study Bible.
Articles at bible.org by Daniel Wallace on every New Testament book. I’ve found nobody better than Wallace at mapping out the occasion and flow of thought of a Bible book, and I consult him every time I study a NT book.

Check ’em out!